I like his views on spending, social security, guns, health care & the border. I don't like his view on abortion & what I'm assuming is his stance gays, but that's not a deal breaker for me. I'll have to look into it more.
His abortion stance is a bit strange. He is Pro-Life/Liberty but puts the burden on the State to make those decisions not the Federal Govt. Basically it's how you believe a "fetus" to be. An alive person or merely something dependent on another for life. He goes with the "alive person" model and thus has to vote pro life/liberty based on his platform.
I basically agree with what you're saying. If he wouldn't compromise about abolishing the IRS and every federal department, nothing would be accomplished. But on the other hand, I think there is too much compromising and pandering to public opinion in politics these days. A great leader strives toward what is right and pushes people in that direction. A great leader is a little shocking and causes changes to the status quo, because the status quo is inefficient and lazy. What we've had for too long is not great leadership. Quite a few of the candidates offer to keep that going. Most folks don't want to disturb the status quo, which is why I think Paul will be fighting an uphill battle. I think that's why Jindal lost. That's definitely not a deal breaker for me. I'm against abortion in most cases and I'm against gay marriage (though not gay unions), but in the big picture those are minor issues in exchange for a sound government. Paul is a responsible politician and doesn't back down from challenges or mockery or conventional thinking. Most other candidates seem to simply react to popular cultural currents.
I agree with you. Every politician passes the buck & puts off the tough decisions. I want a politician that is willing to make changes, but they also have to be willing to work with others to get those changes enacted. I thought it was because he wasn't white...? They are definite back burner issues for me, as I will never have to chose getting an abortion or getting married to a dude. My stance on gay marriage is that the whole system needs to change. The government should have nothing to do with "marriage", only civil unions. Churches can marry people & it should be up to them if gays can get married or not.
While I don't share your thoughts on that it is kinda funny that Jindal doesn't use his given name, Piyush, and Obama never talks about his middle name Hussien(sp?)
I heard a lot of republican north Louisiana types say they didn't vote for Jindal because he was a "foreigner". He needs to make an issue that he was born and raised in Baton Rouge, not India.
Jindal changed his name decades ago. Hussein is one of the most common names in the middle east and North Africa. It's like Smith in North America.
